DESIG NO FCONCRET EFRACTUR EEXPERIMENTS

The analysis and design of structures in the U.S made from concrete follow codes that rely mainly on strength failure criteria along with additional parameters to account for mechanisms of failure not explicitly recognized in these methods. All materials contain flaws that contribute to the overall performance of the various geometries and sizes of the components used to build structures. Additionally, concrete mixture designs have become more advanced with the use of strengthening methods such as fiber reinforcement, which contribute to the complexity of the failure characterization. The risk in the current design practice for concrete is that flaws inherent in the material can grow under loading to unacceptable lengths. It is therefore imperative that steps be taken to advance the current understanding and design practices associated with concrete in order to reliably account for the possible failure mechanisms that may occur. With this in mind, CE401/501, Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures, provides seniors and first year graduate students with the history and evolution of fracture theories and design practices along with a detailed study of the current theories used to understand the fracture mechanics of concrete. As part of a programmatic change that is under consideration in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) at Clarkson University (CU), the lecture portion of the course has been supplemented by an in depth experimental component that requires students to design and perform concrete fracture tests following recommendations provided by the ACI Committee 446. 1 The programmatic curriculum change that is being considered is in response to the ASCE Policy 465 and ABET assessments. These organizations recognize the fact that changes need to be made in current programs in order to better prepare the new breed of engineer and guarantee the advancement of Civil Engineering. The teaching of fracture mechanics in CEE has traditionally focused on theory, leaving laboratory testing to academic and industrial research settings. However, it can be argued that the traditional lecture style of teaching does not challenge the students’ preconceived notions about the physical phenomena they are expected to understand. 2 Moreover, these lecture style courses result in the lowest retention of material by the students because they are not actively challenged by the problems. 3 In addition, employers are not completely satisfied with the individualistic approach to problems that this teaching method promotes. 4 Both ASCE and ABET acknowledge the fact that students need to be given activities more reflective of the demands of the workplace, such as the ability to design and conduct experiments, design systems and components, and function effectively in teams. 5,6 In order to